Letters | Religious freedom, littering fines and airports

Revenue fixer

I now know how the city will fix its revenue problems. Yesterday afternoon, a friend of mine was leaving work. As is his habit, he was eating an apple. While doing so he bit into a bad piece and flicked the piece out the window. He now has almost $200 in fines and court costs for littering. I guess I should mention that him spitting out the apple piece caused a fight. Three birds sitting on the sidewalk squabbled over the morsel. It's no wonder our city is rife with crime. My friend is now substantially poorer, but at least he can feel good about saving our winter-starved wildlife and letting other criminals know that LMPD is cracking down on crime!

KEN FARRIS

Louisville 40220 -

Unintended consequences?

Supporters of Kentucky HB 279 might get more than they bargained for if that bill becomes law. While the clear goal of that bill is to circumvent local ordinances proscribing anti-gay discrimination, it may have ramifications well beyond what the bill's supporters envision. For example, most prosecutions for illegal drug use are under state law. As noted in Friday's CJ article, a 1990 US Supreme Court decision (upholding illegal drug convictions arising out of the use of peyote in Native American religious ceremonies) provides that under the US constitution any such law only need have a rational basis to be enforceable - even in the face of a claim that enforcement of the law is an infringement on an individual's religious liberty.

HB 279 sets a much higher hurdle that the government must overcome whenever a defendant claims that enforcement of a law infringes his/her religious liberty. While this is apparently just what anti-gay proponents seem to be hoping for when it comes to local discrimination laws, have they thought through what effects such legislation might have on other laws such as those criminalizing the use of marijuana?

Under the terms of the bill, if someone prosecuted under state law for the possession and/or use of marijuana claims that such use was "motivated by a sincerely held religious belief," e.g., in helping him/her achieve enlightenment, the burden would fall upon the state to "prove that it has a compelling governmental interest in infringing the specific act?and has used the least restrictive means to further that interest" instead of the much less burdensome "rational relationship" standard of proof under current law. Such words are not just meaningless legalisms. The "compelling governmental interest" standard of proof would make the state's task in successfully prosecuting such behavior a much more difficult and costly task, opening a mile-wide loophole in many laws currently on the books.

I'm not voicing an opinion on the legalization of marijuana use, just pointing out that the kerfuffle over the hemp bill may well be a moot point if the supporters of HB 279 have their way. Maybe they should put that in their pipe and smoke it - who knows, they may even achieve enlightenment.

DIANE ROWLEY

Louisville 40223 -

More on HB 279

It's my sincerely held religious belief that when God drove the man and the woman from the Garden, that He created a wall of separation between His garden and the world. He also put two flaming angels there to prevent any breach of that wall. Yet HB 279 is an attempt to breach that wall of separation. It's also my sincerely held religious beliefs to render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's; and to pay taxes to whom taxes are due. That includes houses of worship, hospitals, nursing homes, homeless shelters, monasteries, cemeteries and seminaries as well as any for-profit or non-profit businesses and properties. They too should have to pay taxes on their holdings. It's my sincerely held religious belief that I shouldn't be taxed to support these facilities. So, the state should refund me a tax credit in the full amount of my tax dollars that state and local government loses for not collecting taxes from them.

DAVID DUNN

Louisville 40220 -

TSA question

Let me get this straight. The TSA will allow me to take a knife on board a airplane but I can't take a bottle of water. Are they afraid I'll waterboard the pilot?

JERRY O. PAYNE

Louisville 40272 -

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

Email this article

Letters | Religious freedom, littering fines and airports

I now know how the city will fix its revenue problems. Yesterday afternoon, a friend of mine was leaving work. As is his habit, he was eating an apple. While doing so he bit into a bad piece and